text:
ITFederal
EDA in Focus
Crime/Court
Interesting Things You Need to Know
Warren Heritage Society
What Matters Warren
Jenspiration
The Food Dude
The Cracked Acorn
Punditry & Prose
Faces of Our Valley
LifeSavor
Fly Fishing with Bruce
Sample Ad Formats
Royal Examiner
Historical Christmas II
James Finck
Christmas is the time of year when everyone seems a little happier and are a little nicer to each other. It is when we look forward to spending time with family and friends enjoying all of our favorite Christmas traditions. Yet, historically speaking, this was not always the case. Especially in America, we did not celebrate Christmas until the 1820s with the publication of a couple of important novels.
What was originally called the Feast of the Nativity reached England in the sixth century and began being called Christmas. Don't think of it as the same holiday as we celebrate today. It was more a drunken party similar to Mardi Gras or Halloween than Christmas. It was gangs of poor going door-to-door demanding gifts. Think of some early Christmas carols. In "Here We Come A-Wassaling" there is the line, "We are not daily beggars that beg from door to door; but we are neighbours' children, whom you have seen before." In "We Wish You a Merry Christmas," we sing about going house to house basically demanding food.
This debauchery at Christmas played a part in America's founding. The radical religious sect known as the Puritans wanted to rid the Church of England of all things Catholic, including the pagan practices that had crept into the Church. One of those practices was Christmas. There is no mention of Christmas in the Bible and no set date for the birth of Jesus. The Catholic Church had set Christmas during the winter solstice to help convert the Germanic tribes by claiming their religious feasts. The practice of Christmas was one of many doctrinally differences that led the Puritans to the New World to set up their "City on the Hill." With Puritanism being one of the most influential institutions in American culture, Christmas was not practiced in the colonies. During and after the Revolutionary War, many British practices, including Christmas, were seen as taboo. In fact, Christmas does not become an official American holiday until 1870.
Christmas as we know it comes in the 1820s because of two important works of fiction (reading really does change the world). America's first great author was Washington Irving. We had many writers at that point, but they mimicked British writing. Irving was the first to write something uniquely American. In 1819 he wrote The Sketchbook of Geoffrey Crayon, Gent that includes some of his most famous stories such as "The Legend of Sleepy Hollow" and "Rip Van Winkle". The one entitled "Christmas" showed an English squire inviting peasants into his home for Christmas. Irving believed Christmas should be a peaceful time where all classes could live in harmony. In his story he invented ancient customs such as family members returning from far away "once more to assemble about the paternal hearth, that rallying-place of affections."
The second book, of course, was The Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens. This 1843 novel, even more than Irving, shaped our current idea of Christmas. The message of charity and good will to all struck a chord in America. I don't have room to discuss this here, but childhood had only recently become a thing. Before, children were just small adults. Now with childhood, parents had a day to lavish their children with gifts without appearing to spoil then.
Reading these stories, Americans came to assume this is how Christmas was supposed to be. Christmas quickly became seen as a family holiday, with peace towards all firmly part of the Christmas celebrations.
Being my last article of the year, I want to give a quick thanks to everyone who makes Historically Speaking possible. A huge thank you to my wife Melissa Finck and Dr. JC Casey who edit all my stories. I could not do this without them. I now have a student assistant who does all the distribution. So, thank you Chris Wilson. Thank you to the editors who run these stories. Lastly, thank you to all the readers, especially those who have sent me positive feedback. I put a great deal of time into these stories and it makes it worth it knowing so many of you enjoy them.
I hope this season does bring you the happiness that Ebenezer Scrooge and Irving's English squire found in their lives. From my family to yours, we wish you a Merry Christmas.
Dr. James Finck is an Associate Professor of History at the University of Science and Arts of Oklahoma and Chair of the Oklahoma Civil War Symposium. Follow Historically Speaking at www.Historicallyspeaking.blog or Facebook at @jamesWfinck.
Share the News:
Related Topics:ChristmasDr. James Finckhistorically speaking
2019 Silent Ideas
Second Amendment Sanctuary
Missile Attacks
Time to get happy!
Mistletoe winds its way through human history
In 1776, the fate of America turned on the Christmas Crossing
Power strip is basic for holiday lighting schemes
Virginia Beer Museum hosts 'Ugly Christmas Sweater' competition to raise the holiday 'spirits'
Want to untangle Christmas tree lights? Walk a reindeer?
Ideas for hiding Christmas presents
Hike Construction Company needs 50 families to build Gingerbread Houses
Second Amendment Rally in Richmond
I attended the rally and was filled with pride and excitement being among so many great Americans and Virginia Patriots! The following day I heard Governor Northam complimenting his 'team' for 'de-escalating' the situation. What pure BS! There was never a situation that warranted de-escalation. The declaration of a 'state of emergency' was nothing less than a government over-action and a ploy to restrict both the First and Second Amendment rights of Virginia citizens who were seriously concerned about the direction of their government. The organizers advertised that a non-violent rally of possibly 50,000 Americans intended to communicate to the Virginia Government their opposition to the bevy of proposed gun control bills that would not have prevented prior gun tragedies or those that will almost certainly occur in the future.
The Governor's emergency declaration was intended to;
– scare people into not attending an assembly which the Governor warned could involve controversy and possible violent behavior,
– inhibit the rally goers on the capital grounds from using small wood support sticks and poles to attach flags and poster board signs to assist in their exercising free speech,
– mis-represent the gathering as an event promoting white supremacists and having a substantial number of outside agitators,
– liken the advertised rally to the previous tragic event in Charlottesville and
– prevent rally participants on the Capital grounds from lawfully carrying firearms either openly or concealed, consistent with their inalienable and Constitutional right to bear arms.
The Governor justified that preventing rally goers from bringing firearms onto the Capital grounds was necessary to ensure safety when the result was just the opposite. The government estimated 6,000 citizens on the Capital grounds, carrying firearms, would have been a sure way to prevent criminals and agitators from initiating mayhem. Forcing rally participants to rely on the Government for safety is exactly what we are saying is unacceptable. The presence of a large crowd of armed, law abiding citizens would have been the best way to prevent violence from being initiated by extremists because the bulk of attendees would not have permitted their event from being high-jacked for another purpose. Thankfully, approximately 16,000 Virginia Patriots, most of whom were armed, surrounded the Capital grounds and had their fellow Patriots' backs. That statement is not at all to disparage the large contingent of law enforcement officers that were at the rally as well. They did their job as ordered and were professional and congenial with the rally attendees who overwhelmingly support the law enforcement community that honors the Constitutional rights of the citizens they serve.
The Governor's declaration was never necessary just because there was internet chatter and some expectation that there might be violence or an attempt to storm the Capital. Negative internet chatter of possible mayhem constantly exists and leaders should not over-react, in an abundance of caution. The news reports of there being several arrests in Washington State of members of one radical group indicates that law enforcement was doing its job of responding to law breakers.
The Governor mischaracterised the vast majority of citizens who planned to attend the rally as potential violent criminals and racists and insulted Virginians that only intended support of their Right to exercise inalienable and Constitutional rights to bear arms for self protection and as a guard against tyranny. He is unfit to occupy the highest office in Virginia and if he had any honor or personal integrity he would apologize to the citizens and resign. However, considering that he did not resign previously when it was learned of his potentially racist past, there should be no expectation that he will do the right thing now.
The violence in Charlottesville was the result of a failure by Virginia's government to effectively address an effort by a radical group to contest the removal of Confederate monuments and to promote their radical white nationalist philosophy. While I strongly oppose white washing history by the removal of historical monuments, any assertion that justifies favoring one racial group over another is equally abhorrent. The truth is that our government was incompetent in separating the rally goers and counter protesters and bears a high level of responsibility for that tragedy. Also, the Governor chooses to exaggerate the dimension of the tragedy with his announcement that the result was the loss of three lives when only one death was relevant to the on-ground conflict. The two police officers that died when their helicopter crashed was not contributed to by the demonstrators or counter protester activities. In reality the Government failed to properly prepare for the Charlottesville event and over-reacted to the planned pro-Second Amendment rally and the Governor only seeks to divert attention from their culpability. Also, the Governor's comparison of the Charlottesville event and Monday's rally is nothing short of a conscious, deliberate effort to deceive the public and impugn the character of the citizens who intended to peacefully voice there opinion on a serious public issue. The Governor purposefully mischaracterized Monday's rally because it fit his ideological bias that gun right supporters are racist and have violent tendencies. Monday's rally had no racial overtones in contrast to the Charlottesville event and there was no legitimate, substantive evidence otherwise. Obviously us Deplorables couldn't possibly have a legitimate, positive message to promote (sarcasm intended).
The Governor has said that the gun control proposals being pushed by the Democrat majority are both common sense and have passed Constitutional scrutiny but he is wrong on both counts and he should be smart enough to know that rather than to just try to hoodwink Virginians. Anyone with any critical thinking ability would realize that;
– Limiting gun purchases to one a month or authorizing local governments to create more dangerous, gun-free-zones would not make citizens safer when the truth is the opposite.
– Requiring all private gun transfers to be contingent on background checks thru Federally Firearm Licensed dealers would not actually prevent criminals from acquiring lethal tools.
– Outlawing semi-automatic firearms, some with features that might intimidate persons in-experienced with weapons, would not make future gun tragedies less damaging.
– Requiring registration of certain firearms accomplishes nothing and is just a precursor to having information that could be used for eventual confiscation and is fully unacceptable.
– Criminalizing the possession of magazines holding more than 10 rounds would not meaningfully reduce the damage associated with firearm violence. Plus, the decision that a magazine with only 10 rounds is safe and permissible, where anything larger is not, is just nonsense. Such thinking is arbitrary rather than based on any facts. This conveniently ignores that it takes minimal skill for a firearm operator to change magazines of any size in mere seconds.
– Existing laws should be enforced to address individuals with firearms who demonstrate an imminent threat to themselves or others rather than designing a new Red Flag law that would clearly be challenged based on a 'possible' threat rather than an 'actual' threat.
As for the Governor's claim of the Constitutionality of the Democrat gun control proposals, evidence exists to the contrary. The Supreme Court Heller ruling in 2010 established that bearing arms is an INDIVIDUAL right. By extension, since the whole of the populace constitutes the militia, individuals would be authorized to possess weapons of a type consistent with those normally carried by military members. While the Supreme Court has yet to formally confirm that specific concept, logic and critical thinking skills virtually guarantee that result when an appropriate case makes it way to their docket. The historical background writings of the Constitution's Framers establish that the meaning of guaranteeing the inalienable right of the People to bear arms is to primarily protect against tyranny. The existing majority of the Supreme Court are Constitutional literalists thankfully and that is further evidence that any class of firearms in general use by the populace is legal for individuals to own and bear. The Supreme Court's McDonald ruling has since affirmed that the Heller ruling applies to states as well as the District of Columbia thus gun rights apply in all political jurisdictions.
Relevant to the Heller ruling, Justice Scalia wrote in essence that gun rights are not absolute, consistent with other Bill of Rights amendments, and the Government has some authority. But I believe that authority is limited to areas that do not 'infringe' on the citizens' rights. In my opinion that would relate only to the government dictating whether firearms must be carried either openly or concealed, limiting the carrying of firearms from places of adversarial activities such as state legislature buildings and Courthouses plus at military or nuclear facilities, or on private property. That would not include schools, recreational facilities or any other government properties. Also, it should be declared that only non-citizens and those with documented, dangerous mental impairments are prevented from access to firearms. Felons who have fully paid their debt to society or those with any convictions of domestic violence should have full firearm rights. No other Constitutional Right is contingent on specific behavior and thus all such rights should not be conditioned. You simply don't have to earn a right by conducting yourself any specific way. Liberty can be temporarily restricted by a prison sentence as part of a penalty for violating the law but that liberty should be reinstated once the penalty has expired. That concept is becoming an accepted realization as evidenced by the current movement for ex-felons to have voting rights.
What we saw at the rally was an impromptu, small segment of Virginia's Militia. That should have sent a clear message to the Democrat controlled legislature that the masses oppose their 'feel good' proposals that would diminish individual liberty, impose unnecessary bureaucratic procedures and make criminals out of law-abiding citizens. They cannot mask their real intent though which is to eliminate the citizens' right to own and bear any firearms with the imposition of felonious penalties. Democrats should take seriously the message that the great citizens of Virginia will not comply with what they truly believe are unconstitutional laws and will not stand idly by when there are legislative attempts to limit their liberty. While we may expect that the Senators and Delegates will attempt to represent the small number of constituents who voted them into office, (as opposed to the majority of citizens that did not participate in voting), the Governor has a higher responsibility to represent ALL of Virginia's citizens. That relates to the heretofore silent majority as well as those that participated in the last election. The pro-Second Amendment rally and the overwhelming support for protecting gun rights, as evidenced by the establishment of sanctuary areas in virtually all of Virginia's cities and counties, should dictate that the Governor veto any contentious gun control laws that pass both bodies of the legislature.
As a realist I lack optimism that our Governor will do the right thing but will instead support more ineffective gun control that will only further divide us as Virginians. As of now the Governor's legacy will most certainly reflect the scandal of his documented racist past behavior. On the other hand, by vetoing the ineffective, Democrat ideologically based gun control proposals it would cement him as a pro-liberty politician that represented the whole of Virginia's citizens rather than just its liberal leaning segment. I would love to be proved wrong and would be only too pleased to advertise a public apology should one become appropriate. But I won't hold my breath.
Gary Kushner
Good luck Joe
The Town of Front Royal lost a good man when Joe Waltz left as town manager.
I had the pleasure of working with Joe when I sat on the Town Council from 2002 to 2006. At that time Joe was the head of the Electric Department. Front Royal is one of only a handful of communities in the state of Virginia that runs its own electric department, buying in bulk from outside suppliers and distributing it to customers inside the limits of Front Royal.
This is done through a very complex distribution system, and maintained by a group of highly trained technicians. This system has served the citizens of Front Royal very well over the years, providing Front Royal with dependable and very affordable electricity.
With the deregulation of the electrical grid by the federal government in the late 1990s, the winners and losers in the electricity game was up for grabs. Chaos ruled and no one really knew how things would shake out.
Front Royal was no exception.
Prices for wholesale electricity were all over the board. Where would Front Royal contract for its wholesale electrical purchases? Which company, which producer, who was legit, and who was a trojan horse, and who was a paper tiger?
The Town Council at that time was made up of neophytes, including me, when it came to the electricity menagerie. We depended heavily on 'the man in charge' of the department at that time to help us understand the options. And in the end, to help make the decisions that would affect Front Royal citizens for years to come.
With a steady hand from Joe, as well as the town manager at the time, Mike Graham, the Town Council was able to make some very sound decisions. Now some 14 years later, Front Royal can offer a very dependable electric supply from a number of varied sources including solar, all at a price that is probably still one of the lowest in the state. For that you can thank Joe Waltz and of course the other excellent public servants who make it happen on a daily basis.
So Joe – Good luck. You served the Town of Front Royal well.
Stan Brooks
Mayor 1992-96
Council 2002 -06
Martin Luther King Jr.'s enduring legacy: 'Beyond Vietnam'
Roger Bianchini
Sometimes words remain appropriate, not only for the era in which they are spoken, but for multiple eras, and perhaps for the length of humanity's struggle to overcome the worst aspects of our collective nature – greed, avarice, hypocrisy and the bondage of others to forward one's own self interests – in other words, FOREVER.
Martin Luther King Jr.'s words of April 4, 1967 now known as the "Beyond Vietnam" speech are such words. They illustrate the depth of Dr. King's comprehension that the Civil Rights Movement was a struggle of more than one race in one nation at one point in time.
These words, spoken exactly one year to the day before his assassination, are why some pause each January to remember and celebrate his life; while others are simply reminded of why he was, and continues to be hated by those attracted to power without compassion.
As the past three years when Royal Examiner has published these words on Martin Luther King Jr. Day, in this first month of 2020 we might again ask ourselves if our ongoing borderless, worldwide war on terror isn't at least in part, a legacy of our collective failure to heed Dr. King's words of April 1967?
And 53 years down the road from this speech as Central American Hispanic refugees fleeing chaos and anarchy in their own nations are increasingly lumped together with international terrorists and drug dealers for partisan political advantage, we must again ask ourselves one final question – how close to the "too late" moment Dr. King described in 1967 are we as a people and a nation today?
– Due to the speech's length, some introductory comments and other details on the Vietnam era have been edited out – deletions are indicated by (…) and some points have been emphasized with bold highlights.
There is nothing except a tragic death wish to prevent us from reordering our priorities so that the pursuit of peace will take precedence over the pursuit of war. – Martin Luther King, Jr. (Photos/Public Domain)
'Beyond Vietnam'
I come to this great magnificent house of worship tonight because my conscience leaves me no other choice. I join you in this meeting because I am in deepest agreement with the aims and work of the organization that brought us together, Clergy and Laymen Concerned About Vietnam. The recent statements of your executive committee are the sentiments of my own heart, and I found myself in full accord when I read its opening lines: "A time comes when silence is betrayal." … The truth of these words is beyond doubt, but the mission to which they call us is a most difficult one
…Even when pressed by the demands of inner truth, men do not easily assume the task of opposing their government's policy, especially in time of war. Nor does the human spirit move without great difficulty against all the apathy of conformist thought within one's own bosom and in the surrounding world … Some of us who have already begun to break the silence of the night have found that the calling to speak is often a vocation of agony, but we must speak. We must speak with all the humility that is appropriate to our limited vision, but we must speak.
And we must rejoice as well, for surely this is the first time in our nation's history that a significant number of its religious leaders have chosen to move beyond the prophesying of smooth patriotism to the high grounds of a firm dissent based upon the mandates of conscience and the reading of history … For we are deeply in need of a new way beyond the darkness that seems so close around us …
"Why are you speaking about the war, Dr. King?" "Why are you joining the voices of dissent?" "Peace and civil rights don't mix," they say. "Aren't you hurting the cause of your people," they ask?
And when I hear them, though I often understand the source of their concern, I am nevertheless greatly saddened, for such questions mean that the inquirers have not really known me, my commitment or my calling. Indeed, their questions suggest that they do not know the world in which they live …
Since I am a preacher by calling, I suppose it is not surprising that I have seven major reasons for bringing Vietnam into the field of my moral vision. There is at the outset a very obvious and almost facile connection between the war in Vietnam and the struggle I and others have been waging in America. A few years ago there was a shining moment in that struggle. It seemed as if there was a real promise of hope for the poor, both black and white, through the Poverty Program.
There were experiments, hopes, new beginnings. Then came the buildup in Vietnam, and I watched this program broken and eviscerated as if it were some idle political plaything on a society gone mad on war. And I knew that America would never invest the necessary funds or energies in rehabilitation of its poor so long as adventures like Vietnam continued to draw men and skills and money like some demonic, destructive suction tube. So I was increasingly compelled to see the war as an enemy of the poor and to attack it as such …
My third reason moves to an even deeper level of awareness, for it grows out of my experience in the ghettos of the North over the last three years, especially the last three summers. As I have walked among the desperate, rejected, and angry young men, I have told them that Molotov cocktails and rifles would not solve their problems. I have tried to offer them my deepest compassion while maintaining my conviction that social change comes most meaningfully through nonviolent action. But they asked, and rightly so, "What about Vietnam?" They asked if our own nation wasn't using massive doses of violence to solve its problems, to bring about the changes it wanted.
Their questions hit home, and I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today – my own government. For the sake of those boys, for the sake of this government, for the sake of the hundreds of thousands trembling under our violence, I cannot be silent …
Now it should be incandescently clear that no one who has any concern for the integrity and life of America today can ignore the present war. If America's soul becomes totally poisoned, part of the autopsy must read "Vietnam." It can never be saved so long as it destroys the hopes of men the world over. So it is that those of us who are yet determined that "America will be" are led down the path of protest and dissent, working for the health of our land.
As if the weight of such a commitment to the life and health of America were not enough, another burden of responsibility was placed upon me in 1964. And I cannot forget that the Nobel Peace Prize was also a commission, a commission to work harder than I had ever worked before for the brotherhood of man. This is a calling that takes me beyond national allegiances.
But even if it were not present, I would yet have to live with the meaning of my commitment to the ministry of Jesus Christ. To me, the relationship of this ministry to the making of peace is so obvious that I sometimes marvel at those who ask me why I am speaking against the war. Could it be that they do not know that the Good News was meant for all men – for communist and capitalist, for their children and ours, for black and for white, for revolutionary and conservative? Have they forgotten that my ministry is in obedience to the one who loved his enemies so fully that he died for them? What then can I say to the Vietcong or to Castro or to Mao as a faithful minister of this one? Can I threaten them with death or must I not share with them my life?
… Finally, as I try to explain for you and for myself the road that leads from Montgomery to this place, I would have offered all that was most valid if I simply said that I must be true to my conviction that I share with all men the calling to be a son of the living God. Beyond the calling of race or nation or creed is this vocation of son-ship and brotherhood. Because I believe that the Father is deeply concerned, especially for His suffering and helpless and outcast children, I come tonight to speak for them. This I believe to be the privilege and the burden of all of us who deem ourselves bound by allegiances and loyalties which are broader and deeper than nationalism and which go beyond our nation's self-defined goals and positions. We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for the victims of our nation, for those it calls "enemy," for no document from human hands can make these humans any less our brothers.
And as I ponder the madness of Vietnam and search within myself for ways to understand and respond in compassion, my mind goes constantly to the people of that peninsula … They must see Americans as strange liberators … We have destroyed their two most cherished institutions: the family and the village. We have destroyed their land and their crops … Now there is little left to build on, save bitterness … They question our political goals and they deny the reality of a peace settlement from which they will be excluded. Their questions are frighteningly relevant. Is our nation planning to build on political myth again, and then shore it up upon the power of new violence?
… At this point I should make it clear that while I have tried in these last few minutes to give a voice to the voiceless in Vietnam and to understand the arguments of those who are called "enemy," I am as deeply concerned about our own troops there as anything else. For it occurs to me that what we are submitting them to in Vietnam is not simply the brutalizing process that goes on in any war where armies face each other and seek to destroy. We are adding cynicism to the process of death, for they must know after a short period there that none of the things we claim to be fighting for are really involved … and the more sophisticated surely realize that we are on the side of the wealthy and the secure, while we create a hell for the poor.
Somehow this madness must cease. We must stop now.
If we do not act, we shall surely be dragged down the long, dark, and shameful corridors of time reserved for those who possess power without compassion, might without morality, and strength without sight. – Martin Luther King, Jr.
I speak as a child of God … I speak as a citizen of the world, for the world as it stands aghast at the path we have taken. I speak as one who loves America, to the leaders of our own nation: The great initiative in this war is ours; the initiative to stop it must be ours.
This is the message of the great Buddhist leaders of Vietnam. Recently one of them wrote these words, and I quote: "Each day the war goes on the hatred increases in the heart of the Vietnamese and in the hearts of those of humanitarian instinct. The Americans are forcing even their friends into becoming their enemies. It is curious that the Americans, who calculate so carefully on the possibilities of military victory, do not realize that in the process they are incurring deep psychological and political defeat. The image of America will never again be the image of revolution, freedom, and democracy, but the image of violence and militarism."
The war in Vietnam is but a symptom of a far deeper malady within the American spirit … and if we ignore this sobering reality, we will find ourselves organizing "clergy and laymen concerned" committees for the next generation. They will be concerned about … Guatemala and Peru. They will be concerned about Thailand and Cambodia. They will be concerned about Mozambique and South Africa. We will be marching for these and a dozen other names and attending rallies without end, unless there is a significant and profound change in American life and policy.
And so, such thoughts take us beyond Vietnam, but not beyond our calling as sons of the living God. In 1957, a sensitive American official overseas said that it seemed to him that our nation was on the wrong side of a world revolution … It is with such activity in mind that the words of the late John F. Kennedy come back to haunt us. Five years ago he said, "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." Increasingly, by choice or by accident, this is the role our nation has taken, the role of those who make peaceful revolution impossible by refusing to give up the privileges and the pleasures that come from the immense profits of overseas investments.
I am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. We must rapidly begin … the shift from a thing-oriented society to a person-oriented society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights, are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, extreme materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered.
A true revolution of values will soon look uneasily on the glaring contrast of poverty and wealth. With righteous indignation, it will look across the seas and see individual capitalists of the West investing huge sums of money in Asia, Africa, and South America, only to take the profits out with no concern for the social betterment of the countries, and say, "This is not just." It will look at our alliance with the landed gentry of South America and say, "This is not just."
The Western arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them, is not just … America, the richest and most powerful nation in the world, can well lead the way in this revolution of values. There is nothing except a tragic death wish to prevent us from reordering our priorities so that the pursuit of peace will take precedence over the pursuit of war. There is nothing to keep us from molding a recalcitrant status quo with bruised hands until we have fashioned it into a brotherhood …
We must rapidly begin the shift from a thing-oriented society to a person-oriented society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights, are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, extreme materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered. – Martin Luther King Jr.
We must not engage in a negative anti-communism, but rather in a positive thrust for democracy, realizing that our greatest defense against communism is to take offensive action in behalf of justice … It is a sad fact that because of comfort, complacency, a morbid fear of communism, and our proneness to adjust to injustice, the Western nations that initiated so much of the revolutionary spirit of the modern world have now become the arch anti-revolutionaries … A genuine revolution of values means in the final analysis that our loyalties must become ecumenical rather than sectional.
Every nation must now develop an overriding loyalty to mankind as a whole in order to preserve the best in their individual societies … This call for a worldwide fellowship that lifts neighborly concern beyond one's tribe, race, class, and nation is in reality a call for an all-embracing and unconditional love for all mankind … When I speak of love I am not speaking of some sentimental and weak response … I am speaking of that force which all of the great religions have seen as the supreme unifying principle of life. Love is somehow the key that unlocks the door which leads to ultimate reality … This Hindu-Muslim-Christian-Jewish-Buddhist belief about ultimate reality is beautifully summed up in the first epistle of Saint John: "Let us love one another, for love is God"
…We are now faced with the fact, my friends, that tomorrow is today. We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now. In this unfolding conundrum of life and history, there is such a thing as being too late … Over the bleached bones and jumbled residues of numerous civilizations are written the pathetic words, "Too late."
There is an invisible book of life that faithfully records our vigilance or our neglect. Omar Khayyam is right: "The moving finger writes, and having writ moves on." We still have a choice today: nonviolent coexistence or violent co-annihilation. We must move past indecision to action. We must find new ways to speak for peace … and justice throughout the developing world, a world that borders on our doors. If we do not act, we shall surely be dragged down the long, dark, and shameful corridors of time reserved for those who possess power without compassion, might without morality, and strength without sight … Now let us begin. Now let us rededicate ourselves to the long and bitter, but beautiful, struggle for a new world …
As that noble bard of yesterday, James Russell Lowell, eloquently stated:
Once to every man and nation comes a moment do decide,
In the strife of truth and Falsehood, for the good or evil side;
Some great cause, God's new Messiah offering each the bloom or blight,
And the choice goes by forever 'twixt that darkness and that light.
Though the cause of evil prosper, yet 'tis truth alone is strong
Though her portions be the scaffold, and upon the throne be wrong
Yet that scaffold sways the future, and behind the dim unknown
Standeth God within the shadow, keeping watch above his own.
And if we will only make the right choice, we will be able to transform this pending cosmic elegy into a creative psalm of peace. If we will make the right choice, we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our world into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. If we will but make the right choice, we will be able to speed up the day, all over America and all over the world, when justice will roll down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream.
'We're not there yet' – NAACP honors Dr. King's memory with a call to continued commitment
Commentary: Can't we do better than this? – State of Emergency as armed protesters head for Richmond
As Royal Examiner and myriad news agencies across the Commonwealth and nation reported, on January 15 based on what is believed to be credible intelligence gathered by Virginia law enforcement agencies, Governor Ralph S. Northam declared a State of Emergency beginning Friday, January 17 (Lee-Jackson Day) and lasting till Tuesday, January 21, the day after an anticipated guns rights demonstration at the State Capitol Complex in Richmond on Monday, January 20 (Martin Luther King Day).
The Democratic Governor's Executive Order # 49 creating the five-day State of Emergency prohibits all weapons, including firearms, from Capitol grounds, and will provide joint law enforcement and public safety agencies resources available to head off or react to any violence tied to planned demonstrations at the state capitol. The order coincides with previous General Assembly initiatives against certain weapons in the Virginia State Capitol area and Executive Order 50 (McAuliffe) prohibiting firearms in offices occupied by executive branch agencies.
"Credible intelligence gathered by Virginia's law enforcement agencies indicates that tens of thousands of advocates plan to converge on Capitol Square for events culminating on January 20, 2020. Available information suggests that a substantial number of these demonstrators are expected to come from outside the Commonwealth, may be armed, and have as their purpose not peaceful assembly but violence, rioting, and insurrection," Governor Northam wrote in Executive Order 49, adding, "Assuring that Virginia's Capitol Square and surrounding public areas are sheltered safe places for those who come to participate in the democratic process, as well as those who work on or near Capitol Square, is my greatest priority."
Overreaction – or not?
Is it State overreaction to citizens' normal desire and right to express political dissent to proposed legislation they disagree with or prudent action to a credible threat from right-wing extremists? Reports of six arrests by the FBI in Maryland, Delaware and Georgia around the time of Governor Northam's State of Emergency declaration may offer a clue.
Multiple news agencies including ABC, NPR and the BBC reported on January 16 that the FBI had arrested three men in Maryland and Delaware with ties to a neo-Nazi group known as "The Base". The men were alleged to have been in possession of several weapons and over 1600 rounds of ammunition and had discussed travelling to Richmond for Monday's demonstration.
An online report we first encountered at the WRIC Newsroom website indicated one of the men, Patrick J. Mathews, was a former reservist in the Canadian Army who was discharged over his ties to white supremacist groups. The criminal complaint indicated Mathews had recently entered the U.S. illegally and had been illegally armed by other men arrested in the FBI operation targeting The Base. Those arrested in Maryland or Delaware at the time of Mathews arrest were Brian M. Lemley, Jr. and William G. Bilbrough.
And on January 17, three more men tied to The Base were arrested by the FBI in Georgia. According to the BBC report they were charged with attempted murder and participation in a criminal organization: "Luke Austin Lane, Michael Helterbrand, and Jacob Kaderli were planning to 'overthrow the government and murder a Bartow County couple' who they believed to be Antifa members, Floyd County (Georgia) police said in a statement."
That BBC report linked Canadian Mathews to the Georgia group and the targeted killing, stating, "The gang member, presumed to be Mr. Matthews, is said to have called for the 'death penalty' against anyone engaged in anti-fascist activities. It was not known if the three men arrested in Georgia were planning to attend the gun-rights rally in Richmond. The group was involved in the gang's paramilitary training camp located at a home (in) Silver Creek, Georgia, police said.
"According to arrest affidavits, The Base is a racially motivated violent extremist group that sought to 'accelerate the downfall of the United States government, incite a race war and establish a white ethno-state,'" the BBC reported.
The shadow of the neo-fascist, white supremacist Charlottesville demonstrations and anti-fascist counter-demonstrations that resulted in three deaths, one anti-fascist demonstrator run down by a self-proclaimed neo-fascist who plowed into a crowd of anti-fascist demonstrators and two state policemen who died in a helicopter crash monitoring the situation on the ground in Charlottesville, appeared to play heavily in Northam's decision.
"Three years ago, Virginia and the nation, watched horrified as civil protest was marred by violence and hate. The events that occurred in Charlottesville, Virginia demonstrated what can happen when peaceful demonstrations are hijacked by those who come into the Commonwealth and do not value the importance of peaceful assembly. We lost three Virginians. We must take all precautions to prevent that from ever happening again," Virginia's Democratic governor wrote in his executive order, continuing, "The anticipated effects of the potential convergence of tens of thousands of demonstrators on Capitol Square, some of whom may not come to assemble peacefully, constitutes an emergency as described in § 44-146.16 of the Code of Virginia (Code).
The call for large numbers of guns rights advocates to gather, perhaps across state and even international lines, at the State Capitol in downtown Richmond on Monday appears to be, at least in part, a culmination of the so-called "2nd Amendment Sanctuary" movement that has circled Virginia in recent weeks and months. That effort led a large number of politically conservative municipalities, including Warren County, to designate themselves sanctuaries against pending gun control legislation being brought forward by the first Democratic majority in both houses of the Virginia General Assembly since 1996.
Second Amendment advocate speakers waive a 'Don't Tread On Me' flag during Dec. 10 Public Hearing on the '2nd Amendment Sanctuary Resolution. The Resolution passed unanimously in front of well over 1,000 citizens, for the most part supporters of that resolution. This and following photos do not suggest anyone pictured plans to be in Richmond armed or otherwise, they are just the only 2nd Amendment debate related photos we have. Royal Examiner File Photos/Roger Bianchini
As previously reported in Royal Examiner, among legislation being forwarded for consideration by Virginia's new Democratic legislative majority are House and Senate Bills that include mandatory background checks for firearms purchases, red flag laws, expanded age restrictions on youth gun use unsupervised by adults, requirements to report stolen or lost firearms within 24 hours, and an expansion of the definition of "illegal assault weapon".
County resolves – what?
The 2nd Amendment Sanctuary initiative propelled forward by these pending gun control bills was introduced to the Warren County Board of Supervisors on November 19. Less than a month later at a December 10 Special Meeting held at Warren County High School to accommodate a crowd spilling out of the school's 1,024-seat auditorium, in its final meeting a majority lame duck County Board of Supervisors did unanimously resolve that Warren County is a sanctuary against what some see as obtrusive gun control laws. But the remaining question is, if not the Virginia State Legislature or State Supreme Court, who defines "obtrusive" or "unconstitutional" – the county board of supervisors; the sheriff; or citizens, some perhaps with a vested interest in not having their backgrounds checked or red flags waived at those backgrounds?
The pro-2nd Amendment Sanctuary Resolution crowd was hostile to the first opposition speaker, but listened quietly to several others after being chastised for rudeness by one of their own.
With such questions still looming, newly elected County Board Chairman Walter Mabe and newly-elected Sheriff Mark Butler expressed some skepticism to a January 7 citizen request that Warren County expand its 2nd Amendment stance to include formation of an armed citizen militia to assist local law enforcement in large-scale emergency or mass casualty situations.
While there is no known evidence linking local guns rights advocates to violent extremist groups like The Base, the danger of legitimate 2nd Amendment advocates having their movement infiltrated or co-opted by agents of more militant extremist groups expressing sympathy for their cause will persist. Such political dynamics are ripe when measured give-and-take political dialogue takes a back seat to in-transient partisan ideological rhetoric.
And what is troublesome in today's political landscape, not only in Virginia, but across the nation is an increasing resistance to political discourse and procedures that are open to a bipartisan search for the truth and grounds for political compromise for a common good, rather than a partisan political one. This seems particularly true, not only in the gun rights versus legislative initiatives to stem gun violence and mass shooting causalities debate, but also surrounding presidential behavior and alleged Constitutional misconduct as the possibility or impossibility of an impartial, factually-based U.S. Senate Impeachment Trial of Donald J. Trump dominates the national political landscape.
Some political scientists and historians have said U.S. politics is currently at its most divisive level since the 1850's lead up to the American Civil War. Governor Northam acknowledged the damaging effect of the breakdown of civil political discourse in calling the State of Emergency in anticipation of thousands of potentially armed, anti-government demonstrators being poised to descend on Richmond in coming days.
"Virginians understand that diversity of opinion keeps our democracy strong. The more voices involved in our political dialogue, the stronger we are. Civil discourse, even and especially, amongst those who disagree, is critical to our democracy's evolution and success. When the civility of that political discourse breaks down, the Commonwealth suffers," Northam wrote in opening his Executive Order 49 State of Emergency declaration.
Let's listen to each other – two sisters described the positives of firearms training and competitive use on them and their family's life.
Hope or conflict?
A recent email from a reader critical of Royal Examiner's content as being "Liberal Propaganda" seemed to initially reflect this breakdown in civil political discourse. In that first message the reader appeared to illustrate some knowledge of the coming Richmond demonstration and perhaps anticipated consequences with the observation, "The Liberal Left VA Government will soon find the Power of the People … (expletive deleted) newspapers like this will soon be a thing of the past."
OUCH – does it really have to be a survival of the most heavily armed or can we continue to dialogue about our differing political and philosophical perspectives in the hope of a mutually acceptable resolution? We decided to try and find out.
After that initial email aligning us with liberal messaging but not citing any examples, we reached out to inquire which articles had aroused the reader's ire. The reply cited "Liberal VA State Government Articles" emanating from the offices of Democratic officials including Governor Northam and U.S. Senator Mark Warner, rather than any original Royal Examiner content.
"It appears that the RE has an infatuation with these folks and always are publishing articles about how much they are doing for the state but nothing is written about the DAMAGE they are doing and the great divide they are causing," our estranged reader replied in a more measured response to our inquiry.
However as we replied, we hope a search of our State Government news category page will illustrate that we publish press releases from both Democratic and Republican state and federal politicians in balance. And this writer feels fairly confident that our Publisher Mike McCool would not allow that state political content to be slanted toward a liberal bias, much less the progressive one this writer might put forward on occasion. And if there just happen to be more Democratic officials in major electoral offices like governor, attorney general and both of Virginia's U.S. Senate seats at this point in time, I would contend that is on a majority of Virginia's voters, more than it is on Royal Examiner.
Will that satisfy our critic and bring them back to occasional forays onto our website to keep up with the goings on in Front Royal and Warren County? Perhaps, perhaps not – but at least we are communicating about our various perspectives. In fact, as our email dialogue continued to include our planned commentary on the Richmond situation and governor's reaction to the intelligence about it, our reader included this thought in a response: "By the way, my hope is for Nothing but Peace and our Rights as American Citizens to stay as written in the US Constitution."
So, perhaps there is hope, not just for us and our estranged reader, but for Virginia and the nation as a whole.
Why not talk and seek movement toward mutually acceptable resolutions beneficial to the most Virginians, and most Americans on issues that ultimately impact us all?
Because if we can't have those discussions where all are willing to listen with an open mind to ideas other than their own, we are likely to continue living in an escalating State of Emergency as we witness the continued decline of civil political discourse into increasingly aggressive and "eyes wide shut" partisan factionalism amidst a world of "alternate facts" (also known as lies) and the potential of armed confrontations between sides such as that Virginia's governor and law enforcement officials fear was, or may be, on the horizon for Richmond in coming days.
New Special Grand Jury needed
With the announcement of charges against Mr. Poe being dropped by the new Prosecutor, the lack and complete absence of any further indictments by either the Special Grand Jury or the Federal Grand Jury, and the growing rumors of a plea agreement for Ms. McDonald, it is apparent that the judicial/law enforcement system has broken down.
Investigations are noteworthy in the complete lack of focus. Investigators have yet to talk to Mr. Egger who could provide a treasure trove of information. They haven't interviewed any of the Supervisors, any of the EDA Board members and may not have even interrogated Jennifer! Her Attorney has tried to contact the VSP to set up an interview but they have not returned his call.
The new Prosecutor has already complained that he can not focus on the charges. The understaffed VSP has been overwhelmed with information provided by the Feds when they dropped out of participating in the Grand Jury. Several heroic citizens have done a remarkable job in uncovering evidence and providing it to Law Enforcement. But, is that really their job?
We need a Special out of County Prosecutor focused only on this outrageous crime. The Special Grand Jury has turned out to be infected with personal relations and incredibly strong bogus charges (misfeasance of the Supervisors) that cost citizens more money in paying for the defense of the Supervisors (against patently bogus charges).
We need a completely new Special Grand Jury. Held out of County, made up of non-Warren County residents eliminating any hint of conflict of interest.
We need a dedicated Virginia State Police Task Force that focuses on this County and this investigation.
True, the Prosecutor and Law Enforcement have other crimes and issues (training, travel, etc.) that precludes their full time efforts. They have highly qualified Special Agents trained in investigative accounting.
What do we need to do to get these programs? Let your Governor know, let the Attorney General know.
Fred Schwartz
If anyone was hoping for a calmer more peaceful decade, then surely by now they are disappointed. With just a few days into 2020, the major news story already is a drone strike and death of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani. Instantly political sides were drawn as Trump supporters praised the president's actions as a strike against terrorism and protection for American lives. Trump detractors criticized the decision as dangerous. Presidential contenders have all denounced the president, calling him basically a war monger and a murderer. As always, I am not here to comment on the president's decision. There is enough of that already. But historically speaking, the president's actions are far from new. We have seen presidents strike Middle Eastern targets as far back as there have been Middle Eastern issues. You can claim he had ulterior motives, the same as previous presidents, but you can't claim his attack is out of the ordinary.
Though most modern presidents have used missile strikes, I want to focus on two, President Clinton and President Reagan, both of whom made similar decisions. When Reagan took over in 1981, one of the principal "bad guys" was Libyan President Muammar Gaddafi. Similar to Iran today, Libya in the 1970s and 1980s was a principal supporter of terrorism. They were outspokenly anti-Israel and supported terrorist groups in Palestine and Syria. Like Iran, they were also actively trying to start a nuclear program.
The 1980s saw an uptick in Islamic terrorism when 239 marines were killed in a bombing in Lebanon in 1983. 1985 saw bombings in Vienna and Rome airports, the high-jacking of a TWA plane and an Italian cruise ship, both with American deaths. Finally, in 1986 American service men were killed and injured in a disco bombing in Berlin. Libya had ties to them all. After the disco bombing, Reagan ordered Operation El Dorado Canyon, which were air strikes against Libya hoping to kill Gaddafi. Unfortunately, Gaddafi was warned of the strikes and escaped before the bombs fell on his compound, sparing his life. The bombing did very little to curtail Libya's support of terrorism as they continued throughout the 1980s. The United Nations condemned the attack, but Americans overwhelmingly supported Reagan's actions, strengthening his popularity.
Two presidents later President Clinton launched his own Middle Eastern attacks. The first time was in June of 1993 when Clinton hit sites in Iraq. Supposedly the attack was in response to an assassination attempt against former President H.W. Bush while he was visiting Kuwait. Saddam Hussein was seen as a leading sponsor of terrorism and, like Iran, was supporting terrorism around the globe. The missiles hit the building where the assassination was planned but did little to curtail Saddam Hussein's support of terrorism. The show of force did help Clinton's poll numbers, which had dropped in recent months.
Clinton's second strike came in August of 1999 and targeted a then little-known terrorist origination known as Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda had recently attacked American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. Clinton's response was a missile attack against Al Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan. The attacks killed 24 but missed Osama bin Laden. This attack has more in common with Trump's recent attack as it was seen more skeptically. Clinton was in the midst of his own impeachment issues and many saw it as an attempt to divert the nation's attention. The catch phrase of the day was "the tail wagging the dog." Clinton had taken a hit with the Black Hawk Down incident and was hoping this show of force would help his image. In the end the attacks on Al Qaeda did little to stop their growth as we all found out on 9/11.
Trump's latest missile attack has some differences and some similarities. Iran is a supporter of terrorism, both in Iraq and Syria, and Soleimani was behind much of the violence. As with Reagan and Clinton, Soleimani and Iran can be tied to several key attacks. Last May they supported the terrorist group that attacked Saudi oil fields. In June two oil tankers were attacked in the Gulf of Oman and a U.S. Navy drone was shot down. In July they captured a British oil tanker. In September they once again supported a terrorist group that attacked Saudi oil fields. In December rockets killed U.S. service men in Kirkuk. Finally, in December they attacked the American embassy in Iraq. Also, all the while, they continued to work towards nuclear weapons. Yes, during the escalation the president and Iran carried on a verbal battle which seemed childish considering the consequences, but the list of terrorist activities is not unlike the list from Libya or Iraq.
The key difference between all these attacks seems to be that Trump was the only one to hit his target. Another difference is that outside of the bin Laden attack, the other attacks occurred in the target's own nation. Soleimani was not in Iran, but Iraq. What we cannot know is the retaliation. Libya, Iraq, and Al Qaeda all vowed retaliation for the bombing. None of the previous presidents stopped the terrorists and we did see more mass destruction, though we can never know if attacks were a response or would have been carried out anyway. Iran did launch missiles at American bases in Iraq, but there were no casualties. Maybe that will be enough for the Iranians to save face. Only time will tell. They do not want to look weak, but are they willing to escalate?
The other major difference is the American response to the attacks. Clinton took some flack, but most of the attacks by American presidents, including Bush and Obama, have been met with positive reviews. Obama was even praised by both parties for taking out Bin Laden. With Trump, as expected, the attacks have come swiftly and brutally. All the major candidates trying to secure the Democratic ticket have condemned Trump. Historically speaking, maybe what Trump has done is no different from past presidents. Maybe it's we who are different and more cynical.
Copyright © 2016-2019 Royal Examiner. All Rights Reserved | Design by National Media Services, Inc.


text:
Die Große Wollbiene oder Garten-Wollbiene (Anthidium manicatum) ist eine Bienenart aus der Familie der Megachilidae und gehört damit zu den Solitärbienen. Diese Art fällt durch eine wespenähnliche schwarz-gelbe Zeichnung auf. Die gelben Streifen vereinigen sich auf der Oberseite des Abdomens nicht. Die Namensgebung ist auf die Verwendung von Pflanzenwolle zum Brutzellenbau zurückzuführen.

Etymologie
"Von lat. 'manicatum''' = 'mit einer Hand versehen', wegen der fünf mehr oder weniger fingerförmigen Fortsätze am Hinterleibsende der Männchen. Der deutsche Name [Garten-Wollbiene] bezieht sich auf einen Lebensraum, in dem man die Art häufig findet."

 Bau der Großen Wollbienen
Die männlichen Tiere sind mit 14 bis 18 Millimeter deutlich größer als die Weibchen, die elf bis zwölf Millimeter groß werden. Der Hinterleib der weiblichen Tiere weist eine meist regelmäßige wespenähnliche gelb-schwarze Zeichnung auf. Die gelben Streifen vereinen sich auf der Oberseite des Abdomens nicht, daher verläuft ein schwarzer Mittelstreifen entlang der Rückenlinie und verjüngt sich in Richtung Hinterleibsende immer weiter. Die Zeichnung der Männchen ist nicht regelmäßig. Die gelben Bereiche sind oft zu Punkten reduziert oder durch schwarze Bereiche unterbrochen. Am Hinterleibsende der Männchen befinden sich fünf Dornen, drei am Endtergit und zwei weitere am äußeren Rand des vorletzten Tergiten. Diese Dornen setzen die Männchen zur Verteidigung des Paarungsreviers gegen Nahrungskonkurrenten ein.

 Revierverhalten der Männchen
Die Männchen besetzen Reviere, in denen sich mehrere bevorzugte Blütenpflanzen – beispielsweise Zieste (Stachys), Salbei (Salvia) oder Herzgespannarten (Leonurus) – befinden, bei denen dann von mehreren Weibchen Pollen, Nektar und Nistmaterial gesammelt wird. Vor diesen Pflanzen patrouilliert das Männchen im Schwebeflug, der dem der Schwebfliegen ähnelt, und vertreibt Nahrungskonkurrenten, wie zum Beispiel Hummeln, Honigbienen oder andere Männchen. Dazu fliegt es auf seinen Gegner zu und krümmt kurz vor dem Zusammenprall seinen Hinterleib nach vorn, so dass die Dornen am Hinterleibsende nach vorn gerichtet sind. Dabei kann es zu Verletzungen der empfindlichen Flügel der Angegriffenen kommen. Werden diese dadurch flugunfähig, müssen sie verhungern.

 Fortpflanzung
Die im jeweiligen Revier eines Männchens Pollen und Nektar sammelnden Weibchen werden von dem Männchen angeflogen und meist auf der Blüte begattet. Jeweils ein Ei legt die weibliche Biene in eine mit Pollen und Nektar gefüllte Brutzelle, die sie in vorgefundenen Erd-, Mauer- und Holzlöchern oder Felsspalten anlegt. Nach der Eiablage verschließt sie die Brutzelle mit Pflanzenwolle. Aus befruchteten Eiern entwickeln sich weibliche und aus unbefruchteten Eiern männliche Tiere.

 Larvalentwicklung und Flugzeit
Die Larve häutet sich nach dem Schlüpfen mehrmals und frisst wochenlang vom Nahrungsvorrat, bevor sie sich in einen Kokon einspinnt und verpuppt. Die Winterpause erfolgt als Ruhelarve. Am Ende der Metamorphose schlüpft aus der Puppe die flugfähige Biene (Imago). In Mitteleuropa ist eine Generation je Jahr ("univoltin") die Regel. In heißen, langen Sommern kann es zu einer zweiten Brut kommen, die aber nur selten erfolgreich ist. Die Weibchen fliegen von Mitte Juni bis Mitte Oktober. Die Männchen fliegen von Mitte Juni bis Ende September.

 Schlafgewohnheiten
Ein ungewöhnliches Verhalten zeigen die Großen Wollbienen beim Schlafen. Wenn es das Wetter erlaubt, beißen sie sich mit den Mandibeln an Pflanzenteilen fest und lassen sich hängen. Zunächst sind die Flügel noch gespreizt. Bei tiefer werdendem Schlaf entspannen sich die Beine und sinken hinab. Bei tiefer Ruhe werden die Flügel am Körper angelegt. Bei Störung lassen sich die Tiere fallen und können sofort abfliegen. Dieses Verhalten kann auch bei anderen Arten der Gattung Anthidium'' beobachtet werden. Weitere Solitärbienenarten, die auch auf diese Weise schlafen, sind beispielsweise bei den Wespenbienen zu finden. Bei Regenwetter oder starkem Wind ziehen die Großen Wollbienen sich wie andere solitär lebende Bienen in wettergeschützte Hohlräume, wie zum Beispiel in noch leere Brutzellen ihrer Niströhren, zurück.

Weblinks

 Umfangreiche Fotogalerie

Einzelnachweise

Bauchsammlerbienen

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


Just finished up working on Tango today in the studio, where I had several "breakthroughs" – ah-ha moments in which I learned something that made me super excited. You would think that after years of taking lessons, I wouldn't have much more to learn, but I do. For me, the best part of dancing is the learning. But it hasn't always been that way. . .
When I started dancing, I just wanted to look good. I, along with so many other people, looked at accomplished dancers and saw only the results. I wanted to get there . . . and fast. After a few years of dancing, I thought I was pretty good. So much so, that during lessons, it was hard for me to accept criticism. I didn't like being told I wasn't doing something wrong.
Even after I finally realized that I had more to learn, it still stung to be corrected. Over time, I learned to accept criticism and feedback, but I still perceived it as something I had to "put up with" to get results. The idea that there would always be someone better than me made me almost want to give up. But I didn't. I kept pushing through because I loved it.
And then…one night, I was right in the middle of a performance, in front of a hundred plus people, when I realized, that wasn't the moment that mattered. I had been working for years to "look good." When I had the opportunity, I enjoyed it, but it wasn't what really fed my spirit. All the time I spent in the studio preparing is what really made me happy. The learning, the growing, the moments of understanding, the relationship I was building with my instructor/partner were the meat and potatoes of why I did it.
Suddenly, I began showing up to my lessons with a different mindset. I embraced corrections like I was a ball of clay allowing my instructor to shape me and make me into something better than I could imagine. The truth: I had been stuck in my limited perceptions about what a good dancer is, and his vision of what I was capable of was way bigger than mine.
There are people in all walks of life who believe that they are good at what they do. In fact, they are so good, that they don't really need to learn anymore. At least that is what they think. But what they don't know is that their beliefs about how good they are actually prevent them from getting any better. Their beliefs keep them locked in to a certain level that may not be the fullest expression of their potential. They reach a plateau in their dancing and then they coast while everyone else passes them by. They probably don't even know that they could be better.
The thing about dancing is, as soon as you attain a certain level of proficiency, an entirely new set of skills becomes available to you. It's a little like a video game where certain rewards are unlocked as you reach each new level. But where some people get stuck is in thinking that there is one advanced level to attain. They keep thinking, am I there yet? It isn't hard to see why they get frustrated when they discover they're not! And as we know, frustration is a good way to block off the flow of development. When you're able to see that the levels are never ending, that what you can attain is unlimited, then you access a freedom and self-acceptance in your pursuits that accelerates your learning. It opens you to receive.
I was talking last night with my friend J who dances Argentine tango. She put it so succinctly when she said to me, "it feels good to settle into the middle of my dance practice, it's so freeing." She wasn't saying that she saw herself as an intermediate dancer, because she is more than that. She was simply saying, her level, or where she was on the continuum of learning, didn't really matter anymore. She gave herself over to the learning, not the attainment. She said, "I just don't judge myself or my dancing anymore." And we both agreed, that is a beautiful place to be.
The point of all of this is that growth, i.e., evolution happens whether you want it to or not and you can deal with it in one of three ways: You can resist it, try to control what's happening and keep things as they are. This strategy often leads to frustration and judgement of yourself and others. You may wonder why you're never satisfied. Or you can be a bystander who waits and watches while everyone else seems to be having the time of their lives. You have reasons for not wanting more. You may be asking yourself, why not me? Or you can be a partner in your own evolution who engages in the process of growth out of a focused desire to become the best version of themselves. You'll probably marvel at how quickly you catch on and how expediently your desires are met.
It is always your choice to resist, wait or engage. These concepts, although related to dance in this blogpost, apply to so many other areas of life where we could easily improve if we opened our hearts and minds to not just accepting criticism and feedback, but embracing it as a gift from our mentors who, like sculptors, put their hands lovingly to a piece of clay to transform us into a work of art.


text:
A Game of Chess
Jamelah Earle • February 14th, 2007
I learned how to play chess when I was 10 years old from a migrant farmer. I had a bit of an attention span problem so I didn't gain much from our lessons, other than the names of the pieces and how to move them. I was terrible at chess back then, and to tell the truth, I remain so, but despite my brutal competitiveness that rears its ugly head whenever I'm doing something that even remotely involves winning, I don't seem to mind that this is a game I almost always lose. For whatever reason, I really like to play chess.
Earlier this week I was writing to a friend about a story I was working on and I said "My problem is actually having something happen in the story. I thought I had all my pieces lined up, but it turns out that I have no plan of attack. Perhaps this goes back to me being a horrible chess player, I don't know." (It all ends happily; I figured out what was supposed to happen and finished writing. I don't like the story much, but then, I can't have everything, I suppose.)
Anyway, I kept thinking about my lack of chess skills and the way I write. The reason I'm not so good at chess is that I don't think ahead. When I start, I have some vague idea of how I'm going to do things, but I tend to forget these things when I'm caught up in the game, until suddenly I'm looking at the board thinking "Oh, bloody hell. Checkmate." With writing, my method seems to be rather similar: I get an idea, I have a general idea of how things should go, I get too interested in the periphery (like whether something should be two sentences or if I should just go for the semicolon), and then suddenly I'm stuck with an irrevocable mess. The difference between writing and chess is, of course, that with writing I can always go back and fix things until they work, yet I think it's a fair parallel.
It could be dangerous to say so, considering how bad I am at it, but I think chess is a writer's game. (Along with poker, of course.) Strategic, deliberate, and novelistic in scope (each game is its own story), there's something inherently writer-like about it. Many writers have used chess in their work, from T.S. Eliot's "The Waste Land" (there's a whole section of the poem called "A Game of Chess") to Samuel Beckett, who was a fan of the game (makes sense then that one of his plays is named Endgame). Though all writers go about their craft differently (which we covered last week), I think there's something to be said for knowing where you want things to go and winding up in that exact spot. In the end, I guess writing is a lot like a game of chess, moving the words and ideas (and perhaps semicolons) around until you reach the end and there's nowhere else to go.
When you write, do you control the direction of things? Or do you follow the path that seems to be laid out for you by your writing? Do you lead it or does it lead you? And, of course, do you play chess?
15 Responses to "A Game of Chess"
by Stokey on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 08:50 pm
love chessI'm a great chess player, always thought I could beat Fisher, if given the chance. Used to play with my grandfather...until he couldn't beat me anymore. Then he died. Too bad.In writing, I think it's easier if the character go where they want to and the author just follows along describing what they do. (That's situation "A".) Situation "B" is when you're inspired and the spirits of Shakespeare, Kerouac, and Dostoyevski are within you forcing you to put words on the computer screen. Or...there's situation "C" writer's block. You can't bring yourself to go back to that half-finished novel, those unstarted short stories, those poems you didn't bother to submit anywhere. Which is where I am now.
by willtupper on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 10:43 pm
Da Mystery of Chessboxin'"The game of chess, is like a swordfightYou must think first, before you moveToad style is immensely strong, and immune to nearly anyweaponWhen it's properly used, it's almost invincible"Do you listen to Wu-Tang Clan? You might. You probably do. They make a great case through a number of their joints that chess is just a metaphor for life.And writing is a metaphor for life too, right? It's not the real thing, but rather it's symbols that we keep handling, arranging and rearranging until we get them just right. It's not the BEST book in the world, not by a longshot, but if you've got a few hours to kill and you're in a bookstore, check out The RZA's "Wu-Tang Manual." There's a short section on the art of chess, the actual game, and it's importance (in art, and in life). It might do you just right.How I look at it when I write is like: I'm the player, the story (or poem, article, or whatever) is my opponent. We're friends; this is a game among kin. And when we begin, I KNOW where I want this game to be going. Towards an ending I find satisfying (i.e. winning). That can mean a good conclusion, that can mean a paycheck. It all depends on that particular game, and who I happen to be playing with.BUT, but... I am NOT my opponent. My opponent, my writing, may have a "mind" of it's own. And it's bound to take me in directions I may not have seen, force me to think on my toes, reach and make moves that take me time to puzzle out. Things that make me streeeeetch... to figure what out what it's all about.So, yes. I love chess, learned it from my father. And I love words, learned how to put them in proper order from many, many other wonderful people. Are they the same? Writing's life, and life's a game.So play more! Get off your computer and go play more! Unless you play chess on your computer (I often do). In that case, just stay where you are.This was a good question, Jamelah. But I think the case you make could apply to ANY game, any discipline or study. Isn't there a Zen saying, something like "From one thing, we know 10,000 things?" Chess can be like editing (eliminating excess "moves," streamlining the "board" until only victors remain). Chess can be like gardening (isn't a garden just another game board?).Chess can be like sex (where you put your pieces... when you make your moves).You see where I'm going with this, don't you? :) When you feel limited in your craft as a writer, or when you feel limited by your skills (or lack of) as a chessplayer, figure out what you RULE at, and see if that discipline when lend you some insight into your current dilemas.Or, whatver. I got the soundtrack to the new cartoon "Afro Samurai" (done by the RZA!) today. So I'm going to go check that out.Thanks for listening :).
by Nasdijj on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 11:02 pm
RIVERNo one will believe this. No one. So I suppose I have nothing to lose by writing it.No one got this when I wrote it but there was a current behind the creation of the title of my book: THE BLOOD RUNS LIKE A RIVER THROUGH MY DREAMS.I believe deeply in rivers. They do not take to being pushed too well. They have currents of their own.I do not remember writing anything.Ever.Not one word of it.Any of it. I will not remember writing this. I am always shocked at what people claim is work written by me. I simply don't remember writing a single word.That there is some (subversive) "plan" amuses me something considerable.I don't plan. Plan what.I suppose I write things because both sane and insane people tell me I do.But it's all a river and I'm just in it.Often, that river is thick with blood.The river is not paradise. It doesn't stop for much. If anything.I guess some writers plot war plans. I just shrug.I wish that there was an alternative. I wish I would shut the fuck up. I wish I had never written a single word.Writing is the demon. I believe that. It is evil and I hate it but there it is.I despise writing and I despise books. I told you, you would not believe it.The current just moves you downstream. You can fight it if you want. It would not matter what you fight or surrender to.My responsibility as a writer is to at least try to survive. The river.Sometimes I can. Mainly I cannot.I give up and then the river really has me.There is no game plan. There is no war plan. There is no plan.There is only the river and it runs black with blood just outside the bedroom window where the oak tree scratches up against the glass.We will never be friends, the river and I. We might have been lovers once. If so, there was some turbulence.The truth is that I do not care to know what I have written even if critics are hellbent on informing me.I would deny ever writing a single word, but why bother.The critics, the audience, and the teachers have never been either relevant or germane to anything I have supposedly put to print. I don't listen to them because I do not know how and even if I did know how to listen politely, I would not do it.No critics. No audience. No teachers. No culture. None of it. There is only the river and it will take you where it wants. You survive it or you don't.I am always treading water and remain incredulous that Other Writer Types can't see it. The treading water in this whirlpool.You won't believe it. But the blood runs like a river through my dreams.
by warrenweappa on Thursday, February 15, 2007 06:33 am
I Play Chess & My GameI play strangers every Tuesday at a coffeehouse off South Congress in Austin. Sometimes members of my informal chess league show up.I'm doing research for a writing project right now. As for the current, I try to develop characters, I try to do everything! But most of all, I try to get a short piece done every week.If someone can suggest a good chess book for me to improve my game, please do.
by brooklyn on Thursday, February 15, 2007 09:28 am
the poker mind and the chess mindJamelah, I think you're on to something here. And, since LitKicks has now run articles comparing writing to chess and to poker, I have to paste in a quote from Edgar Allen Poe's "Murders in the Rue Morgue", where he discusses the mentality of the chess player as opposed to the card player. A chess player calculates, says Poe, but a card player analyzes:"The faculty of re-solution is possibly much invigorated by mathematical study, and especially by that highest branch of it which, unjustly, and merely on account of its retrograde operations, has been called, as if par excellence, analysis. Yet to calculate is not in itself to analyse. A chess-player, for example, does the one without effort at the other. It follows that the game of chess, in its effects upon mental character, is greatly misunderstood. I am not now writing a treatise, but simply prefacing a somewhat peculiar narrative by observations very much at random; I will, therefore, take occasion to assert that the higher powers of the reflective intellect are more decidedly and more usefully tasked by the unostentatious game of draughts than by a the elaborate frivolity of chess. In this latter, where the pieces have different and bizarre motions, with various and variable values, what is only complex is mistaken (a not unusual error) for what is profound. The attention is here called powerfully into play. If it flag for an instant, an oversight is committed resulting in injury or defeat. The possible moves being not only manifold but involute, the chances of such oversights are multiplied; and in nine cases out of ten it is the more concentrative rather than the more acute player who conquers. In draughts, on the contrary, where the moves are unique and have but little variation, the probabilities of inadvertence are diminished, and the mere attention being left comparatively unemployed, what advantages are obtained by either party are obtained by superior acumen. To be less abstract--Let us suppose a game of draughts where the pieces are reduced to four kings, and where, of course, no oversight is to be expected. It is obvious that here the victory can be decided (the players being at all equal) only by some recherche movement, the result of some strong exertion of the intellect. Deprived of ordinary resources, the analyst throws himself into the spirit of his opponent, identifies himself therewith, and not unfrequently sees thus, at a glance, the sole methods (sometime indeed absurdly simple ones) by which he may seduce into error or hurry into miscalculation.Whist has long been noted for its influence upon what is termed the calculating power; and men of the highest order of intellect have been known to take an apparently unaccountable delight in it, while eschewing chess as frivolous. Beyond doubt there is nothing of a similar nature so greatly tasking the faculty of analysis. The best chess-player in Christendom may be little more than the best player of chess; but proficiency in whist implies capacity for success in all those more important undertakings where mind struggles with mind. When I say proficiency, I mean that perfection in the game which includes a comprehension of all the sources whence legitimate advantage may be derived. These are not only manifold but multiform, and lie frequently among recesses of thought altogether inaccessible to the ordinary understanding. To observe attentively is to remember distinctly; and, so far, the concentrative chess-player will do very well at whist; while the rules of Hoyle (themselves based upon the mere mechanism of the game) are sufficiently and generally comprehensible. Thus to have a retentive memory, and to proceed by "the book," are points commonly regarded as the sum total of good playing. But it is in matters beyond the limits of mere rule that the skill of the analyst is evinced. He makes, in silence, a host of observations and inferences. So, perhaps, do his companions; and the difference in the extent of the information obtained, lies not so much in the validity of the inference as in the quality of the observation. The necessary knowledge is that of what to observe. Our player confines himself not at all; nor, because the game is the object, does he reject deductions from things external to the game. He examines the countenance of his partner, comparing it carefully with that of each of his opponents. He considers the mode of assorting the cards in each hand; often counting trump by trump, and honor by honor, through the glances bestowed by their holders upon each. He notes every variation of face as the play progresses, gathering a fund of thought from the differences in the expression of certainty, of surprise, of triumph, or of chagrin. From the manner of gathering up a trick he judges whether the person taking it can make another in the suit. He recognises what is played through feint, by the air with which it is thrown upon the table. A casual or inadvertent word; the accidental dropping or turning of a card, with the accompanying anxiety or carelessness in regard to its concealment; the counting of the tricks, with the order of their arrangement; embarrassment, hesitation, eagerness or trepidation--all afford, to his apparently intuitive perception, indications of the true state of affairs. The first two or three rounds having been played, he is in full possession of the contents of each hand, and thenceforward puts down his cards with as absolute a precision of purpose as if the rest of the party had turned outward the faces of their own."
by Milton on Thursday, February 15, 2007 12:42 pm
well now I'm depressedI'm also a wretched chess player. I remember learning the game at age eight, taught by a friend whose parents mandated that he play at least two games a day, likely because they had read in some magazine that little boys who play chess are more likely to become doctors and marry nice Jewish girls when they grow up.After losing fairly consistently to my friend for a few months, I felt I'd developed the skills necessary to teach my little brother the rules, and then proceed to checkmate the living shit out of him. So I taught him (being my younger brother, he'd go along with me for just about anything, no matter how boring he found it), and the first few games were massacres. But then, out of nowhere, he started beating me. Again and again. And to make it more infuriating, he would occasionally get confused and ask, very sweetly and innocently, "wait, how does the knight move?" Then he'd take me out four moves later.What bothered me the most about this was that I didn't feel my brother appreciated the reasons why he kept winning. He just did it, and usually in messy, improvised ways. Sometimes I would get upset, and explain to him at length how brilliant my strategy for that game had been, how clever, how intricate, going back over the game move by move in order to demonstrate that, while he had won easily, my game had been so much more stylish and cerebral. But still he won, almost every time.Academic writing has always been second-nature to me (unfortunately). As a journalist, I always have to watch myself when quoting other people, as I have a tendency to add, subtract, and substitute words to make the quote sound better (I realized I had a serious problem with this when I found myself "tweaking" a passage from Henry James). Yet fiction has always been extremely difficult. When I begin a story, the first things I think of are the major motifs, the metaphors, the ways in which this story will cleverly skew the symbolic order of some other story. While writing I spend a lot of time on individual sentences, endlessly reworking them until they sound absolutely perfect. Only after I'm done do I realize that the story makes no sense. Or that it has no plot. Or - most common of all - that the story just stops without really ending; that I didn't quite finish the job.I'd honestly never thought about this before, but my problems with chess are exactly the same as my problems with fiction writing. Bummer, man.(By the way, I'm surprised no one's mentioned Vladimir Nabokov. His first published works were chess columns written for a Berlin newspaper; his third novel - which, in Russian, translates to "The Luzhin Defense" - was about a chess player; and when once asked why he was writer, he replied, with typical smarmy understatement: "I just like composing problems with elegant solutions.")
by Nasdijj on Thursday, February 15, 2007 01:14 pm
I empathize. If we really want to be depressed and stay depressed, go back to Brooklyn, and apply any (pick one) convoluted theory to REWRITING. Oh, my god. I unequivocally reject the very sick and twisted notion of REWRITING. Just put a lampshade on my head, make me balance naked on a chair to barking dogs, and plug me in. How can I possibly rewrite something I have no recollection of writing in the first place. Rewriting. I hope there's no theory behind it. Just bite me.
by Billectric on Thursday, February 15, 2007 08:49 pm
1,2-1 or 1-1,2That's how the horse moves.I used to play chess with my father and it was fun, but now, I can't concentrate on it because all I can think about in my spare time are these stories I'm writing.
by Stokey on Thursday, February 15, 2007 09:45 pm
And just like little brother, you've written an interesting story without really trying.
by jamelah on Thursday, February 15, 2007 09:58 pm
Hi Will -- Gotta love any reply that involves Wu-Tang.Anything can be compared to anything else, that's true. I like to say that writing is like pie.Before I die I hope to get to a point where I don't suck at chess, so I guess I'd better be careful not to die anytime soon.
And then up in a response, I said that writing is like pie, which is not a game, but maybe I'll get to that next week. Hehehahem.The Poe is a nice addition, thanks.
Ah, there's nothing wrong with academic writing, except when it's unreadable and full of jargon, which happens more often than not, but occasionally it's really good. Or maybe I'm just saying that because I know I have to reconcile myself with the fact that I'm going to have to break down and go to grad school, though I haven't quite gotten there yet.For the most miserable eight months of my life I was a reporter, which is neither here nor there, but it was always entertaining when people would babble nonsense for 10 minutes and then say "Make me sound good."After reading your response, I became further convinced that chess and writing go together like The Captain and Tenille. My all-time favorite rejection letter said "This sounds good, but we typically publish more traditional pieces that contain things like character development and plot." Who knew such things were important when there were such gorgeous sentences to be written?
by YudhishthirS on Thursday, February 15, 2007 10:21 pm
Watch a movie called Shatranj Ke Khiladi (it means the chess players), it might not improve your chess game , but it's really interesting. It's about these two guys who play chess all day and night.
by Milton on Friday, February 16, 2007 03:46 am
I get the "make me sound good" request approximately 15 times a week. Actually, in what has thus far been the high point of my professional life, two months ago I got to go to Gore Vidal's house and sit with him in his living room for a 45 minute interview. (I know that it was 45 minutes because he stopped, mid-sentence, right when the first side of my 90 minute tape clicked off, and said "well, that's enough of that, don't you think?")Anyway, Vidal is one of the greatest talkers of the last half-century; perhaps the only person I've ever met who somehow uses semicolons while speaking. And yet, as I was leaving, he called after me: "I trust you'll make me sound reasonably coherent in this...THING you're writing about me, won't you?"
"This Is The Beat Generation" by John Clellon Holmes
by Levi Asher Sunday, July 24, 1994 02:21 pm
The original 1952 New York Times Magazine Article that introduced the phrase "Beat Generation" to the world.
Carl Solomon
by Levi Asher Wednesday, August 24, 1994 08:46 am
All the Beat writers inspired themselves with doppelgängers, authentic hipsters who embodied their ideals with great authenticity. Jack Kerouac had Neal Cassady, William S. Burroughs had Herbert Huncke ... and Allen Ginsberg had Carl Solomon.
... Read more and add your thoughts (4 comments)
Cassidy's Tale
by John Perry Barlow Thursday, November 3, 1994 01:27 pm
"Cassidy" is one of the Grateful Dead's most beautiful songs. Lyricist John Perry Barlow tells of the two people, a Beat Generation drifter and a newborn child, who inspired it.
... Read more and add your thoughts
by Kevin Kizer Monday, July 2, 2001 07:30 pm
The surprising full life story of Hunter S. Thompson: novelist, journalist, American.
On Western Haiku
by Cor van den Heuvel Saturday, March 2, 2002 03:17 pm
Cor van den Heuvel surveys the Western side of the Haiku tradition.
Cruelty, Revolution, and Deviance: Rimbaud and Artaud as Ideology Critique
by Matthew Landis Saturday, June 21, 2003 02:52 am
The performer is no longer the object of the spectator, but rather her/his confessor. The spectator's emotional response should be induced by a confrontational, violent experience.
A Reader's Manifesto
by Levi Asher Friday, April 1, 2005 08:50 pm
Reading is confrontation. At the end of a good book, you may decide to change your life, and a reader or writer is somebody for whom that possibility is always open. This is why a person who discovers a great work of literature (or music, or art, or any other form of creative expression) often appears for the moment like a crazed animal, twitching and mumbling, incomprehensible. Don't talk to this person -- give them time -- they are emerging from some cocoon right now, and you are an unwelcome witness ...
Literature's Final Table: An Imaginary Poker Match
by Levi Asher Saturday, April 16, 2005 02:00 am
If Prince Hamlet, Don Quixote, Becky Sharp, Captain Ahab, Isabel Archer, Jay Gatsby, Dean Moriarty, Florentino Ariza and Michael Corleone were at the final table in the World Series of Poker, who would win the million dollars?
Godlike, by Richard Hell
by Levi Asher Tuesday, July 5, 2005 11:21 pm
Richard Hell's beautiful new novel, an imaginative spin upon the legend of the French poets Paul Verlaine and Arthur Rimbaud.
Wodehouse in Remsenburg
by Eli Stein Thursday, September 22, 2005 01:02 am
A search for P. G. Wodehouse's grave on Long Island, New York.
For Sale: Baby Shoes, Never Worn.
by Jamelah Earle Wednesday, September 20, 2006 09:42 pm
Ernest Hemingway's famous (and sad) six-word story is an extreme example of flash fiction. Flash, also known as micro, sudden, short-short, postcard, minute, quick, furious, and skinny, is a type of story that has a limited number of words (definitely under 1,000, but in many cases, under 500). Typically, it has a traditional beginning-middle-end story arc, though of course it happens in an ultra-condensed form.
Poker and Postmodernism: The Cards I'm Playing
by Levi Asher Monday, January 15, 2007 04:36 pm
What do Texas Hold'em poker and postmodern literature have in common, and how does a song by the Who help explain it?
E. Howard Hunt, Novelist
by Levi Asher Tuesday, January 23, 2007 08:02 pm
E. Howard Hunt, pulp novelist and key Watergate operative, has died.
The Greatest American Book: Walden by Henry David Thoreau
by Levi Asher Thursday, July 5, 2007 07:43 pm
Levi Asher explains why he considers Walden by Henry David Thoreau the greatest of all American books.
Can Laura Albert Be Forgiven?
I am dismayed to hear that many people hope or believe that J. T. LeRoy/Laura Albert is now forever "destroyed". Destroyed? A fiction writer? What's that about?

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


On Friday the 13th (March 13, 2018), the NY Chapter of the Horror Writers Association hosted NIGHT TERRORS, an evening of horror stories, raffles, and trivia giveaways at Parkside Lounge in New York City.
If you missed out, don't despair! The HWA-NY Chapter will be again be hosting their SUMMER DARK reading series, beginning June 1st.
All photos by Alp Beck–thanks, Alp!